On 4th March: The Supreme Court of India has requested the government’s response regarding alleged gender bias in the promotions of female army officers. Thirty women officers filed a contempt petition citing disparities in their promotion process compared to male counterparts. The plea challenges outcomes of a selection board recommending only eight out of 136 women officers for promotion, against 42 available slots, contrary to a November 3 Supreme Court directive advocating for fair and transparent selection processes for women officers.
NEW DELHI: On Monday (4th March): The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, called upon the Central Government for a detailed response by March 11, concerning a plea alleging unfair treatment in the promotional process for female army officers compared to their male counterparts. The group of 30 women officers filed a contempt petition, pointing out discrepancies in their empanelment for promotion.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud directed the central government to respond by March 11.
“Once we find that the process was fair, we will leave it,” the court said. “You (Centre) file a short affidavit indicating what was the criteria followed for empanelment of male officers.”
These officers are contesting the outcomes of a selection board convened in December, which recommended only eight out of 136 women officers for the rank of Colonel, against 42 available slots. This action, they argue, contradicts a Supreme Court directive from November 3, which mandated a fair and transparent selection process, one that had previously been affirmed to ensure equality in the promotional avenues for women in non-combat roles.
READ ALSO: Supreme Court Declines to Entertain Plea on Farmers’ MSP Demand
“The attitude of discrimination persists. The direction was not to include empaneled officers. They have done precisely that,” senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, who appeared for the petitioners along with advocate Rakesh Kumar.
The contention centers on the criteria used for evaluating the officers, with the petitioners claiming a bias that favored previously empaneled candidates, thereby seeking the merit benchmark and disadvantaging women candidates. The Supreme Court has expressed its intention to scrutinize the selection process closely, emphasizing the need for a clear justification from the government, ensuring that the merit and efforts of these officers are duly recognized without gender bias.
“There is no contempt. As such, it is very difficult to say if contempt is made out,” the court observed. “They did not reconsider those who got empaneled but considered their merit as a benchmark. The idea was to protect those officers who have attained that benchmark, so that their merit is not disturbed.”
As the case unfolds, it highlights gender equality within the Indian Army’s ranks, underlining the broader issue of ensuring equitable treatment and opportunities for women in the armed forces. This legal battle not only seeks justice for the petitioners but also aims to set a precedent for fair and transparent promotional practices, reinforcing the principles of equality enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
“Before conducting Selection Board No. 3, the respondents were bound to allocate the batch-wise & year-wise vacancies and minimum one vacancy must have been given batch-wise year wise…Considering already empaneled officers with non-empaneled officers was violation of principle of equality enshrined under Article 14 & 16(1) of the Constitution,” it said.
READ ALSO: Supreme Court Declines to Entertain Plea on Farmers’ MSP Demand
